Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Time To Think (Sarah Whatmore album)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Time To Think (Sarah Whatmore album)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Whatmore is notabible in the past as she had hits in the then, but I nominated this as I question the notability of this album as nothing indicates its notability. When I read WP:NALBUMS, it completely failed that guideline. Donnie Park (talk) 20:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No Sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  --  I 'mperator 00:33, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep We're clearly looking at different articles here Otter; I see at least three reliable sources. As for the nominator's reason: "In general, if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia. Demos, mixtapes, bootlegs, promo-only, and unreleased albums are in general not notable; however, they may be notable if they have significant independent coverage in reliable sources. Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting." I consider debut albums of notable individuals worthy of inclusion (especially when sources for verification exist) Multiple coverings in reliable sources is the general notability criterion WP:GNG. (Also, "Whatmore is notabible in the past as she had hits in the then" is a statement based on a false assumption. If Whatmore was notable at some point, she still is. (Notability is not temporary)) - Mgm|(talk) 12:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mgm. It has multiple sources cited, and I just added one more, an article in the Daily Mirror. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 23:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.